How much of a role do you think that WWII and its aftermath had in the eventual breakup of the USSR?

BlondieBC

Banned
How much of a role do you think that World War II and its aftermath had in the eventual breakup of the USSR?

A couple of users here have suggested that without WWII and its aftermath (specifically holding an empire in Eastern Europe and fighting a Cold War against the U.S.), the USSR would have likely survived and avoided breaking up:

https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...t-the-fall-of-france-50-years-earlier.409620/

What I'm wondering is this--do you agree with this sentiment? Indeed, do you think that the Soviet collapse and break-up would likely be completely avoided in a TL where there is either no Soviet involvement or a much smaller Soviet involvement in World War II (both of which can be done by avoiding the Fall of France in 1940)?

IMO, the demographic issues associated with Stalin prewar actions and WW2 greatly contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union.
 
I actually think Russia is stronger without WW2.

First, Russia avoids the destruction of Ukraine and much of their industrial base.

Two, Russia saves 20 to 30 million people--the size of a European nation in of itself.

Three, Russia does not have the cost of major occupation duties and the attempts of being a global hegemon.

Fourth, without the WW2 bogeyman, after Stalin, destalinization may allow Russia to take a course more like China's after Mao. A gradual liberation of economic policy that prevents Russia's economic collapse, but with the bonus that Russia already has industry, grain, and oil.

Fifth, the psychological toll of WW2 is demographically incalculable. Not only were there many women who would not find husbands (them being killed by the millions in the war), but the men who returned were psychologically damaged beyond repair--not by a little, but a lot. What effect does this have on families and their psychological well being?

Due to Stalin's aggressive industrialization policies, Russia's economy was on its way to being the world's second largest, even without the war and the occupation of eastern Europe. Easing of Stalinization may have left Russia as a formidable power without any of the ideological hang ups that the devastation of WW2 necessitated.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Please allow me to respond to this:

I actually think Russia is stronger without WW2.

First, Russia avoids the destruction of Ukraine and much of their industrial base.

Agreed with all of this.

Two, Russia saves 20 to 30 million people--the size of a European nation in of itself.

Please keep in mind that the total population increase will be more than that; after all, these 27 million people would also go on to have their own children, grandchildren, et cetera. Thus, we might ultimately see a Soviet population that is 50 to 80 million--rather than 27 million--larger than our TL.

Three, Russia does not have the cost of major occupation duties and the attempts of being a global hegemon.

Agreed; after all, this means no Warsaw Pact and no Cold War with the U.S.

Fourth, without the WW2 bogeyman, after Stalin, destalinization may allow Russia to take a course more like China's after Mao. A gradual liberation of economic policy that prevents Russia's economic collapse, but with the bonus that Russia already has industry, grain, and oil.

That I'm not so sure about; after all, Stalinism appeared to be working quite well for the U.S.S.R.'s economy. Thus, why change things in regards to this (with the exception of getting rid of the gulags, et cetera, of course)?

Fifth, the psychological toll of WW2 is demographically incalculable. Not only were there many women who would not find husbands (them being killed by the millions in the war), but the men who returned were psychologically damaged beyond repair--not by a little, but a lot. What effect does this have on families and their psychological well being?

Due to Stalin's aggressive industrialization policies, Russia's economy was on its way to being the world's second largest, even without the war and the occupation of eastern Europe. Easing of Stalinization may have left Russia as a formidable power without any of the ideological hang ups that the devastation of WW2 necessitated.

Completely agreed with all of this.
 
Please allow me to respond to this:



Agreed with all of this.



Please keep in mind that the total population increase will be more than that; after all, these 27 million people would also go on to have their own children, grandchildren, et cetera. Thus, we might ultimately see a Soviet population that is 50 to 80 million--rather than 27 million--larger than our TL.



Agreed; after all, this means no Warsaw Pact and no Cold War with the U.S.



That I'm not so sure about; after all, Stalinism appeared to be working quite well for the U.S.S.R.'s economy. Thus, why change things in regards to this (with the exception of getting rid of the gulags, et cetera, of course)?



Completely agreed with all of this.

1. That's also 3 times as many people that the Soviet economy needs to employ: without the markets of Eastern Europe under their control and with a globe in which France, Great Britain, Japan, and Italy also aren't ruined (And therefore maintain their Empires, including both the motivation and military-industrial ability to challenge the Commies... right on the borders of their home turf) and the USSR tries to avoid an ideological beef with the USA (Who's still Western Hemisphere focused), can the planned economy of Stalin really handle that much labor power without resorting to useless "pure throughput" projects like China has to today? Megacities in the Siberian tundra would be interesting make-work projects.

2. No Warsaw Pact and no Cold War to produce and/or prop-up friendly Communist regimes (Stalin never has the strategic necessity to discard his favored "Socialism in One Country" approach, and again the Imperial Powers still have intact military machines, economies, industrial bases, and the morale will/self-confidence to fight for their system), the Soviets are also running into the problem of diplomatic isolation and no vent for their newly-built industrial potential. Say what you want about the military-industrial complex: it helps keep factory workers gainfully employed when domestic demand is down.


3. And the gulags are abandoned... why exactly?
 
Top